The JORC Committee and JORC parent bodies (AIG, AusIMM and Minerals Council of Australia) are seeking a project manager to help progress the current JORC Code update. This is a key, full-time role, working with the AusIMM, MCA and AIG leadership to support and project-manage the review and deliver a set of reforms. The role will be a highly visible leadership role with significant engagement with external stakeholders, at various levels across the stakeholder groups. The position reports to AusIMM Chief Operating Officer, on behalf of the JORC parent bodies.
The update process is expected to continue for the next 2-3 years. This appointment will be for an initial period of 12 months with the potential for renewal.
Key responsibilities of the role include:
A copy of the position description is available by contacting Helen Milovanovic (firstname.lastname@example.org).
Expressions of interest in the role should be received by Friday, 5th March, 2021.
The Australasian Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) has released for public submission an online survey seeking comment ahead of the 2021 review and update of the JORC Code.
Submissions are open online at http://www.jorc.org/code-update.asp until 12th February 2021.
The survey is the next step of the review process and will be followed by a summary issues paper to be circulated at the end of April 2021. Further industry feedback will then be sought before finalisation of the updated code.
The JORC Chair , Steve Hunt has noted “We would normally have started the periodic review of the JORC code with public meetings of JORC stakeholders, though as with many things in 2020 this has not been possible due to the COVID pandemic impacts. The survey allows us to start receiving feedback from various stakeholders and to plan for more direct engagement in early 2021 as restrictions ease”.
The Code was last updated in 2012 and there are a number of areas where industry, regulator and public expectations have evolved since the last update. Importantly, the key focus of the Code remains to provide principles based disclosure transparency for investors and potential investors in the mining and exploration markets. The update survey is open to individuals, companies and other stakeholder groups to provide feedback on the JORC Code including their views on specific areas for review, improvement or alignment within the Code.
AIG President Andrew Waltho said “all AIG members involved in mineral exploration, resource evaluation and both mineral resource and ore reserves estimation are strongly encouraged to contribute to the survey”. “Professional geoscientists are critically important stakeholders whose voices need to be heard during the JORC Code review and update process” he said.
“There is unprecedented interest globally, particularly amongst business and securities regulators, in codes of practice for public reporting of exploration results, mineral resources and ore reserves” he said. “Australia is no exception”.
“All AIG members have an obligation to both comply with and contribute to compliance with the JORC Code as a condition of institute membership” Mr Waltho said.
“The JORC Code update provides exploration and mining professionals an opportunity to contribute to the continued development of the code and helping to ensure that JORC and Australia retain a lead role in setting standards of professional practice in this field” Mr Waltho said.
Mr Waltho stressed the importance of the code update process and urged AIG members to contribute, both individually and through their employers prior to the survey closing date of 12th February, 2021.
The survey software allows the survey to be completed in multiple sessions from the same device. The software is multiplatform and optimised for both desktop and mobile. All information provided will be managed and used in accordance with this privacy statement and policy.
SEG webinar presented by Greg Hodges, Sander Geophysics
SEG’s European Region Advisory Committee (ERAC) presented a webinar on “Voodoo Geophysics” examining questionable practices instrumentation systems promoted by individuals and companies in January 2019.
The exploration industry has been plagued since the dawn of technology with near?magical oil, gold and waterfinders. They do untold damage to the reputation and business of honest geophysical applications and research. A geophysicist with sound scientific knowledge can usually recognize when geophysics is “from the dark side”, but it can be difficult to convince non?scientists.
Some common characteristics of voodoo geophysical methods are: dubious theoretical bases, fantastic levels of instrument sensitivity, phenomenally accurate interpretations, extraordinary levels of secrecy, and combative or evasive response to challenges.
Fraudulent methods evade scrutiny. Vendors shy away from technical testing and publication. Refusal of the purveyor of a new system to comply with evaluation and publication of results must be viewed with suspicion.
Greg Hodges has established a “voodoo geophysics” database with more than 80 entries so far. He has previously published on this topic.
The SEG webinar is available via You Tube. The video comprises a presentation, followed by the webinar Q&A session.
Updated regulations to allow U.S. mining and exploration companies to report mineral resources resources. Competent person requirements also feature in the new rules for the first time.
In October, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted a final rule that overhauls its existing disclosure requirements for mining company issuers. This represents the first major change since Guide 7 was adopted almost 30 years ago and brings the U.S. into line with countries following CRIRSCO reporting codes. U.S. companies will be required to begin to comply with the new rules in its first fiscal year beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2021.
Under the current SEC reporting rules, mining companies are not permitted to disclose mineral resources. In Canada, Australia, South Africa and other countries, companies have been required to disclose resources where it would be material information for investors.
Dual listed companies will benefit from decreased compliance costs. Previously, companies listed in the U.S.A. and a country following the CRIRSCO convention for mineral resource and ore reserve reporting were compelled to produce different annual reports and other public disclosure documents dealing with resources and reserves for different markets. U.S. exploration companies should find that the new rules assist with raising funds for exploration in the U.S.A. rather than having to resort to listing on overseas markets, including the TSX, TSX.V and ASX.
U.S. companies that are only subject to the SEC rules, may experience increased compliance costs because of the new requirement to disclose mineral resources and have statements of resources and reserves prepared by a qualified person. Canadian companies that are dual-listed in the US and Canada, have been allowed to comply with Canadian rules (NI 43-101) so are unlikely to be affected by the change.
The SEC announcement included some important provisions.
Geothermal energy is specifically excluded from the new rules.
A principles-based definition of materiality, consistent with Securities Act Rule 405 and Exchange Act Rule 12b-2, was adopted by the commission, whereby a matter is material if there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would attach importance to it in determining whether to buy or sell securities. The commission also proposed that a company should follow an approach requiring aggregation of all mining properties, regardless of size or type of commodity produced, when assessing the materiality of a registrant’s mining operations.
The commission also adopted a definition of mining operations that includes operations on all mining properties that:
The commission also requires that companies materially disclose the basis for setting forward prices for commodities which form an essential component of asset valuation and, therefore, asset materiality. Companies may not exceed the average price for the preceding 24 months. Beyond this, however, qualified persons may use any reasonable and justifiable price, with transparent justification.
The new rules permit a mineral resources to be disclosed inclusive of mineral reserves, as long as mineral resources exclusive of reserves are also stated. This rule is more specific than current requirements of some other reporting codes, including the JORC Code (2012).
Inferred resources are also able to be used in economic analysis, as long as certain conditions are met.
The new rules adhere to the CRIRSCO convention where a public report about a company’s exploration results, mineral resources, and mineral reserves must be based on and fairly reflect information and supporting documentation prepared by a “competent” or “qualified person.” This is the first time that the commission has defined a role for competent persons which may be both individuals, or companies employing individuals responsible for preparing reports.
A “qualified person” is defined as a “mineral industry professional with at least five years of relevant experience in the type of mineralization and type of deposit under consideration and in the specific type of activity that person is undertaking”. Additionally, qualified persons must be “an eligible member or licensee in good standing of a recognised professional organisation at the time the technical report is prepared”. These requirements effectively mirror those of the JORC Code (2012).
The new rules allow multiple qualified persons to prepare a technical report provided the sections of the report for which individuals are responsible are clearly specified, signed dated and consented to by each individual.
Reports must include a consent statement from the qualified person, state whether the qualified person is an employee of the company and, if not an employee, what relationship or interests the qualified person may have in the company.
The rules specifically indemnify the qualified person from findings and conclusions regarding certain aspects of modifying factors discussed in technical reports that the qualified person specifically states were based on information provided by the company – another first and an important legal protection for individuals or groups acting as qualified persons.
A “recognised professional organisation” would have to be either recognised within the mining industry as a reputable professional association, or be a board authorised by U.S. federal, state or foreign statute to regulate professionals in the mining, geoscience, or related field.
Furthermore, the organization must:
The commission has elected, however, to adopt a principles-based approach to professional organisation recognition rather than the approach adopted by existing CRIRSCO codes of publishing a list of Recognised Overseas Professional Organisations (ROPO) updated by organisations responsible for reporting standards in individual countries from time to time. AIG is considered to fully meet the commissions requirements of a recognised professional organisation, supported by it being recognised in all current jurisdictions where CRIRSCO template reporting codes are in use.
AIG welcomes the SEC announcement which brings the U.S.A. closer to countries with effective, transparent and material codes for exploration result, mineral resource and ore reserve reporting that provide informed investors with a basis for sound mineral asset investment decisions. The new rules also provide an opportunity for Australian geoscientists, experienced in the application of the JORC Code and Canada’s National Instrument NI 43-101, to share their knowledge and experience with their U.S. counterparts.
The SEC release announcing the new rules is available here.
The Professional Regulatory Board of Geology which operates under the Professional Regulation Commission of the Phillippines has recognised that reciprocity exists between geoscience bodies in Australia and the Philippines.
Accordingly, Australian geoscientists are now able to take the Philippines geologist licensure examination.
The recognition of reciprocity between the two countries follows efforts by Scott Robson, an Australian geologist resident in the Philippines to be allowed to take the licensure examination. Mr Robson has a BSc from Monash University and his professional standing in Australia was supported by letters provided by both AIG and AusIMM. The Professional Regulatory Board of Geology recognised that Mr Robson’s degree was equivalent to a bachelor’s degree from a Philippines university and that reciprocity on the practice of geology exists between the two countries.
The ruling is seen as establishing the opportunity for other Australian geologists to undertake the Philippines geologist licensure examination in the future.
Prepared 12 September, 2018
Approved by Council 3 October 2018
The Australian Institute of Geoscientists (AIG) ABN 22 002 266 659 recognises the importance of privacy protection and takes all practicable measures to ensure the privacy of any Personal Information provided to it for the conduct of AIG activities.
Personal Information means information or an opinion about an identified individual, or an individual who is reasonably identifiable:
Sensitive Information means information or an opinion about an individual’s racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, membership of a political association, religious beliefs or affiliations, philosophical beliefs, membership of a professional or trade association, membership of a trade union, sexual orientation or practices or criminal record that is also personal information, health information, genetic information, biometric information or biometric templates.
Spam Act means the Spam Act 2003 (Cth).
2. What Information Do We Collect?
The personal information we collect from you includes:
All payments made using online facilities provided by AIG are processed using a secure, external website provided by AIG’s bank. AIG itself does not handle, collect, or store any of the financial or credit card details of anyone making payments through the website and takes no responsibility for the security of that information.
3. How Do We Collect Your Personal Information?
Our preference is to collect your Personal Information directly from you, unless it is unreasonable or impractical to do so.
Information will generally be collected from the following sources:
4. Why Do We Need Your Personal Information?
AIG may use and disclose your Personal Information for the primary purpose for which we collected it, such as:
We may also use and disclose your Personal Information for other purposes permitted or required by law, including reasonably related (or directly related, for Sensitive Information) secondary purposes that are within your reasonable expectations.
If you do not provide us with the Personal Information, or you withdraw your consent for AIG to collect, use and disclose your personal information, we may be unable to provide our services to you.
5. Communication From Us
We do not use Sensitive Information for marketing purposes.
We may use and disclose your Personal Information (other than Sensitive Information) to provide you with information on:
where you have consented to us doing so. All electronic messages will identify AIG.
If at any time you no longer wish to receive direct marketing from us or do not want your information disclosed for direct marketing, you may unsubscribe using the link in each email message, using the newsletter subscription link on the AIG website home page, or by contacting us using the details below.
Please note that even if you have requested not to receive further direct marketing communications, we may nevertheless continue to provide you with information about changes to our terms and conditions for the supply of our services or activities, and other factual information as permitted under the Privacy Act and Spam Act.
6. Will We Give Your Personal Information to Anyone Else?
We will not sell, trade or transfer any of the Personal Information we collect to third parties, unless permitted or required to under the Privacy Act.
We may disclose Personal Information to third parties in the following circumstances:
Please note that AIG member’s names, membership grade, membership number and state of residence may be made publicly available through the AIG website for the sole purpose of confirming AIG membership.
7. How Do We Protect Personal Information?
The security of your personal details on the AIG website will depend on both your actions and ours. When you use the website, we require you to take specific measures to protect against unauthorised access, such as:
8. Where is Your Information Stored?
We (and our subcontractors) may hold electronic records of your Personal Information using cloud technology or other electronic means, or in paper form. These means of holding Personal Information may include offshore storage.
It is not practicable for us to specify in advance the location of every service provider with whom we deal and their locations. However, typically AIG’s website and membership database is stored in Australia. Email contact information used for the distribution of newsletters and information collected by AIG surveys is stored in the United States of America. Information collected for our “AIGeoscope” web newspaper is stored in Switzerland.
9. Access, Correction and Further Information
We will provide you with access to your Personal Information held by us unless we are permitted under the Privacy Act to refuse to provide you with such access. Please contact us via the details below if you:
There is no charge for requesting access to your Personal Information but we may require you to meet our reasonable costs in actually providing you with access.
We will use reasonable efforts to deal promptly with complaints and inquiries and, in any event, acknowledge your request within 30 days.
If you are not satisfied with how we manage your complaint, you may contact the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner at www.oaic.gov.au.
11. Further Information
Ms Lynn Vigar
AIG Executive Officer
PO Box 576
CROWS NEST NSW 1585
T: +61 2 9431 8662
Recent personal experience has highlighted the importance of every day document management for geoscientists working in industry or government.
The AIG Code of Ethics requires compliance with professional standards for balanced, material and transparent public reporting of exploration results, mineral resources and ore reserves (the JORC Code) and valuation of mineral securities (the VALMIN Code). These codes of practice invariably require production of reports. But they are not the only activity that requires geoscientists to document interpretations and actions of geological data, or exercise judgement in the course of our work. Commercial disputes or perceived non-compliance with corporations, privacy and other laws can result in work performed by geoscientists becoming legally discoverable in the course of preparing for court action. It’s not just the Complaints o Ethics and Standards Committee to which we may need to demonstrate sound professional practice.
There are several measures that have proved to be useful in my experience.
What is your experience? Do you have additional experience and ideas that can contribute to good practice by others? Leave a post on this page to continue the conversation.
18 July 2018
A review of AIG’s Code of Ethics, Complaints and Ethics and Standards processes is nearing completion.
The review of AIG’s Code of Ethics and complaints process was initiated in April 2018. Several, valuable submissions were received from members and considered during review.
Interim results were presented to the AIG Council at it’s recent, annual face to face meeting in Sydney, where several additional questions were raised. Legal advice on these issues is currently being sought. The review will result in changes to the Code of Ethics that will be presented to members for consideration and review by members at an extraordinary general meeting of the Institute by the end of 2018. The changes will be designed to ensure that the Code of Ethics remains a viable set of principles, to support AIG’s role of maintaining demonstrably high standards of professional practice by members.
The revised Complaints and Ethics and Standards processes include a timeline for notification and review of complaints relating to practices of members.
Complaints relating to the professional conduct of AIG members may be lodged by any member of the public. Complaints must be lodged in writing, by email to email@example.com or using the on-line form provided on the AIG website. A description of the complaints process is also available on the website.
Procedural fairness for members subject to a complaint is ensured by a two tiered complaints handling process, involving receipt and initial review of each complaint by the Complaints Committee that refers complaints considered to warrant detailed consideration and action by the Ethics and Standards Committee. Disciplinary action against members is recommended by the Ethics and Standards Committee to the Institute Council. Members have the ability of appealing Ethics and Standards decisions to the Council.
The Chairpersons of the Complaints and Ethics and Standards Committees are currently Andrew Waltho FAIG RPGeo and Michael Edwards MAIG RPGeo respectively. The current chairpersons of all Council committees and subcommittees are published in each issue of AIG News.
Two complaints have been received since the AIG AGM in May.
One complaint is currently being considered by the Ethics and Standards Committee. The second resulted in the member being confidentially advised of an adverse finding in relation to compliance with the JORC Code (2012).
The announcement in which the member was nominated as the Competent Person included the following shortcomings:
The issues addressed in the complaint decision refer to JORC (2012) clauses 6, 9, 25, 28 and 50, Appendix 3 and Table 1.
The member was advised to carefully review the announcement in relation to the relevant sections of the JORC Code (2012) to prevent recurrence of the identified shortcomings in future work as a Competent Person and given 14 days to submit an appeal relating to the Ethics and Standards Committee decision.
Review of the nominated sections of the JORC Code by all members acting as Competent Persons is recommended.
Chair, Complaints Committee
The AIG Council has initiated a review of AIG’s Code of Ethics and Complaints / Ethics and Standards disciplinary processes. The review is being conducted with the assistance of a leading, national law firm.
All members agree to comply with the Institute’s Code of Ethics upon joining AIG. The Code sets standards of professional conduct and practice through the code itself, and other standards including the JORC and VALMIN codes that are referenced by it.
The Code of Ethics has been little changed since AIG was formed and has been proved to be a robust and fair set of principals to be followed by members. Minor changes have been introduced on one or two occasions to deal with the impacts of changes to Australian corporate law. AIG’s complaints process was redesigned some years ago to increase procedural fairness for members affected by allegations of poor professional practice. The principal impact of these changes was the separation of the responsibilities for investigating and ruling on complaints with the formation of a Complaints Committee to work in hand with the Institute’s Ethics and Standards Committee. The review will also address changes to the Code of Ethics needed due to the implementation of a revised AIG Constitution in 2016. The recent judgement of the Supreme Court of Western Australia in Ridley v AusIMM provided a catalyst for the review.
Members are invited to submit comments and ideas to be considered during the review. Please submit comments by email to firstname.lastname@example.org by 22nd April, 2018.
The review will be finalised during May. Proposed changes will need to be submitted to AIG members for review and approval.
Maintaining the security of personal computer systems is a constant challenge facing all of us.
Recent, global ransomware attacks that affected a number of businesses around the world area high profile example of what can happen if unauthorised, inappropriate access is obtained to any computer used for professional practice purposes. Members have a professional and ethical responsibility to maintain confidentiality of information that may be commercially sensitive, irrespective of whether you work for a company or are a self employed consultant.
There are many and varied techniques used by people, intent on accessing others’ personal information, data, or simply intent on causing disruption and inconvenience to discuss individually. There are, however, several basic principles that can be followed to help make your computer and data more secure, to prevent unauthorised access, and resilient if your computer is compromised.
In Australia, internet service providers are not obliged to report intrusions to their systems resulting in unauthorised access to client data. This is not the case in the USA, Europe and a number of other countries where disclosure can alert Australian users of on-line services to issues.
There are several on-line services that can be used, safely, to check whether your email account has been compromised, which can be a clue to identifying more serious issues where email addresses are used as account names by on-line services. I regularly check https://haveibeenpwned.com to check whether my email address(es) are known to have been compromised.
Finding your email on one of these lists should prompt you to immediately change your password for the affected account.
Unfortunately, these are issues that we all need to deal with in an on-line world. Taking a few simple steps can make a big difference when it comes to keeping your data and on-line identity as safe as practicable.
The list of ideas above isn’t exhaustive. It’s a summary of what I do routinely, day to day, and the measures are not onerous. Do you have any ideas and experiences to share? Add a comment to this post using the form below.
Andrew Waltho FAIG, RPGeo